Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Bowl back id

  1. #1

    Default Bowl back id

    Hi, recently aquired an old bowl back and carrying out a light referb as the condition is surprisingly good. The leather case it came in is beyond repair really but has done the protection job well over the years.
    No apparent maker marks apart from the internal sticker and the bridge mark of John Grey and sons, not sure if they made it so any ideas appreciated. Thanks.

    Attachment 203146Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20220908_134104.jpg 
Views:	59 
Size:	88.3 KB 
ID:	203147Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20220908_134030.jpg 
Views:	49 
Size:	80.0 KB 
ID:	203148Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20220908_135230.jpg 
Views:	52 
Size:	570.7 KB 
ID:	203149Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20220908_134204.jpg 
Views:	68 
Size:	192.5 KB 
ID:	203150Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20220908_133958.jpg 
Views:	75 
Size:	354.1 KB 
ID:	203151Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20220908_134136 (1).jpg 
Views:	61 
Size:	299.9 KB 
ID:	203152Click image for larger version. 

Name:	martin5.jpg 
Views:	47 
Size:	159.3 KB 
ID:	203153Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20220908_134844.jpg 
Views:	52 
Size:	106.4 KB 
ID:	203154

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Portland, Ore.
    Posts
    355

    Default Re: Bowl back id

    I can confirm that Globe was, indeed, a New York distributor -- not a manufacturer. But have no other clues -- sorry.

  3. #3
    Mando-Accumulator Jim Garber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Westchester, NY
    Posts
    30,753

    Default Re: Bowl back id

    Jonm: I believe yours is the Globe mandolin discussed on this thread from last month. I don't know if there is much more we can say about it. It does resemble a later teens Martin bowlback but I am not sure if Globe had any connection with Martin. That company or Meisel was not mentioned in the Johnston/Boak Martin book.
    Jim

    My Stream on Soundcloud
    Facebook
    19th Century Tunes
    Playing lately:
    1924 Gibson A4 - 2018 Campanella A-5 - 2007 Brentrup A4C - 1915 Frank Merwin Ashley violin - Huss & Dalton DS - 1923 Gibson A2 black snakehead - '83 Flatiron A5-2 - 1939 Gibson L-00 - 1936 Epiphone Deluxe - 1928 Gibson L-5 - ca. 1890s Fairbanks Senator Banjo - ca. 1923 Vega Style M tenor banjo - ca. 1920 Weymann Style 25 Mandolin-Banjo - National RM-1

  4. #4

    Default Re: Bowl back id

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Garber View Post
    Jonm: I believe yours is the Globe mandolin discussed on this thread from last month. I don't know if there is much more we can say about it. It does resemble a later teens Martin bowlback but I am not sure if Globe had any connection with Martin. That company or Meisel was not mentioned in the Johnston/Boak Martin book.
    Thanks for the info Jim, I didn't spot the original discusion and it is the same mando, a friend purchased it on ebay and has handed it to me for inspection/clean as I have taken to restoring (attempting to!) old bowbacks. This is the first American one that I have come across and seems nicely made with above average parts.
    The bridge is a mystery and was possibly a later replacement? Not sure Grey and sons made mandolin bridges but they have certainly put their stamp on it.
    Yes, it does resemble a Martin, the inside is completely paper lined which covers any makers mark should there be any. No mark on the headstock back.

    This is an almost identical one
    https://www.worthpoint.com/worthoped...yle-1815666988

    The mandolin has stood the test of time probably sat in its case in an old shed/attic for most of its 100+ years with only light fret wear and a few dings on the sound board. The case is all there but in very poor condition and would be quite a job to repair/rebuild so will suggest keeping as a piece of mando history, it has done its job.

    Much obliged for the info

  5. #5
    Moderator MikeEdgerton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Howell, NJ
    Posts
    26,875

    Default Re: Bowl back id

    They went to a whole lot of trouble to make it look like a Martin if it isn't. I think Martin would have branded it one way or the other like they did with the rest of their private label stuff.
    "It's comparable to playing a cheese slicer."
    --M. Stillion

    "Bargain instruments are no bargains if you can't play them"
    --J. Garber

  6. #6

    Default Re: Bowl back id

    I opened a thread on this mandolin a few weeks back as Jim Garber has already mentioned but no-one was able to add any extra info to a much earlier thread. We can now see the whole headstock properly with these new photos. I wonder if John Grey retailed it at some point and added their name to an existing bridge as it is clearly a US made instrument.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Bowl back id

    This Martin has the same dot marker arrangement but smaller- as per Martin seemed to like to do:
    https://manchestermusicmill.com/1914...sc-used-x4211/

    On the other thread I started, I now see that Mick asked what the mandolin sold for- and it was a mere £63! My main reason for not bidding higher was twofold- bowl backs take up more room and are not so easy to stash away and secondly, as I don't play my current two, I felt that even though I thought it would play with minimal attention, I would not play it, so it was not a compulsive attempt to own it- but I was only one of two who bid on it. I see that the Worthpoint mandolin and the one I have posted a link to are in the exact date range I speculated- I suppose the metal parts really help create a date range.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Bowl back id

    Quote Originally Posted by NickR View Post
    This Martin has the same dot marker arrangement but smaller- as per Martin seemed to like to do:
    https://manchestermusicmill.com/1914...sc-used-x4211/

    On the other thread I started, I now see that Mick asked what the mandolin sold for- and it was a mere £63! My main reason for not bidding higher was twofold- bowl backs take up more room and are not so easy to stash away and secondly, as I don't play my current two, I felt that even though I thought it would play with minimal attention, I would not play it, so it was not a compulsive attempt to own it- but I was only one of two who bid on it. I see that the Worthpoint mandolin and the one I have posted a link to are in the exact date range I speculated- I suppose the metal parts really help create a date range.
    Hi Nick,
    The mandolin seems a good buy with little work to get it playing. In my uneducated opinion it appears very much like the Martin mandolin in my last post with maybe some later fret board work done, apart from this I have nothing to compare it with. The most important thing, imo, is to get it playing well so it can be enjoyed again.

    I think the history behind these old mandolins is fascinating, the thought that this one may have travelled across the oceans to reach here and the adventures and playing it has done in its journey.

    The John Grey and sons bridge is a mystery that may never be solved, did they make mandolin bridges or just stamp the ones on the instruments they sold? Has anyone come across one before? Some more info here; https://web.archive.org/web/20080105...reyhistory.htm
    Cheers, Jon

  9. #9

    Default Re: Bowl back id

    I posted the mandolin up to get some photos recorded for posterity as so little appears to be known about Globe. I did find a really lovely Globe guitar which is it seems a Washburn derived model made by Lyon & Healy. Certainly, the mandolin appears to be well made and as mentioned earlier- it does have so much that suggests Martin- either as the maker or somebody trying hard to copy a Martin instrument. As also mentioned, normally Martin made instruments sold by third parties have clear marks that can prove the origin whereas this mandolin does not. It may well remain a mystery but Martin certainly appears to be a likely suspect! Here is that guitar:
    https://reverb.com/item/4592627-vint...project-guitar

  10. #10
    Moderator MikeEdgerton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Howell, NJ
    Posts
    26,875

    Default Re: Bowl back id

    Quote Originally Posted by NickR View Post
    This Martin has the same dot marker arrangement but smaller- as per Martin seemed to like to do...
    Some or all of those tiny Martin dots were clay.
    "It's comparable to playing a cheese slicer."
    --M. Stillion

    "Bargain instruments are no bargains if you can't play them"
    --J. Garber

  11. The following members say thank you to MikeEdgerton for this post:


  12. #11
    Full Grown and Cussin' brunello97's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor/Austin
    Posts
    6,281

    Default Re: Bowl back id

    I looked through my Martin files, and interestingly I didn't see any of their 'student' models, featuring fewer bowl stave, that also had a scalloped 'skirt' transitioning between bowl staves and top. None of the examples of their 0, 00, 000 models that I have files of, have such deep scalloping.

    It would be interesting clue if others have examples with such.

    The Martins I have examples of with the deeply scalloped 'skirt' all are their better lines with numerous more bowl staves.

    I'm not staking any position based on the files I have, just plugging some information in.


    As with Jim and Nick and Mike, when I saw the better image of the headstock, I thought "Martin..."


    Mike, did you get the word on the ceramic fret dots from a visit to Nazareth?

    That's pretty cool.

    Mick
    Ever tried, ever failed? No matter. Try again, fail again. Fail better.--Samuel Beckett
    ______________________

    '05 Cuisinart Toaster
    '93 Chuck Taylor lowtops
    '12 Stetson Open Road
    '06 Bialetti expresso maker
    '14 Irish Linen Ramon Puig

  13. #12

    Default Re: Bowl back id

    Yes, that is an interesting fact from Mike about clay. Interestingly, it seems that Fender never used clay dots- they were vulcanised fibreboard which is basically lino! Anyway, I don't intend to mess with those on my old Tele to find out more but someone did do a chemical analysis and that was confirmed! It just goes to show how many old verities are not so.

  14. #13

    Default Re: Bowl back id

    What, no radium dots? Imagine it would have been an attractive feature for several decades.

  15. #14

    Default Re: Bowl back id

    Quote Originally Posted by NickR View Post
    This Martin has the same dot marker arrangement but smaller- as per Martin seemed to like to do:
    https://manchestermusicmill.com/1914...sc-used-x4211/

    On the other thread I started, I now see that Mick asked what the mandolin sold for- and it was a mere £63! My main reason for not bidding higher was twofold- bowl backs take up more room and are not so easy to stash away and secondly, as I don't play my current two, I felt that even though I thought it would play with minimal attention, I would not play it, so it was not a compulsive attempt to own it- but I was only one of two who bid on it. I see that the Worthpoint mandolin and the one I have posted a link to are in the exact date range I speculated- I suppose the metal parts really help create a date range.
    Another very similar one here;
    https://vintage-instruments.com/shop...mandolin-1915/
    ....same no. bowl staves, skirt depth, headstock, tuners, 3dot ebony fret board with side markers,etc.
    So to conclude, imo it seems some Martins went out unmarked for the retailer to put their own mark on like the one I am working on.
    Very nice guitar you found there Nick, that birdseye maple looks stunning!

  16. The following members say thank you to jonm for this post:


Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •